[ NNSquad ] Re: India Plans to Block .XXX

[Ben Kamen <bkamen@benjammin.net>]

Unless mandated by law, I can't imagine why any company in that
business would voluntarily buy into a domain that makes it so easy to
be censored and thus hurt their bottom line. Not that they may or may
not wait to out of good faith, but now we're talking dollars and
cents.

I wouldn't be surprised if it fizzles or companies go the multi-TLD
route.

 -Ben

  [ Ben, I guess you haven't been following this very closely,
    since this has all been discussed in detail many times before.

    But it doesn't hurt to emphasize again that what the new gTLDs
    are mostly about is enriching those players involved in the
    distribution of associated domains -- what I call 
    the "domain-industrial complex."  

    Various of the would-be new gTLD operators are remarkably candid
    in their expectations of riches (the term "gold rush" isn't
    applied for no reason!) based mainly on "protective"
    registrations -- that is, firms signing up in new gTLDs that they
    don't really want to be in, solely to protect their name,
    trademarks, etc. in those new gTLDs.  This is apart from phishers
    and other crooks of course, who view every new gTLD as another
    location to help obscure their operations.

    There has been no outcry from the Internet user community at large
    for more gTLDs.  For most people, they just represent more confusion,
    which tends to make the established gTLDs like dot-com even more
    valuable.

    And of course, also keeping registrations in dot-com, dot-org,
    and/or country-based TLDs will always be the standard mode of
    operation, even for firms who feel it necessary to register in
    new gTLDs as well.
   
    The entire gTLD expansion scheme is all about enriching gTLD
    operators, not about the community.  The results are almost all
    downsides for the Internet community beyond the domain-industrial
    complex.

    But even worse in the case of .xxx, ICANN has handed oppressive
    regimes a tool for broad censorship, by creating a place (which
    will be *widely* blocked) where such regimes could order
    "undesirable" sites to locate after being forced to give up their
    own domains in unblocked TLDs.

    ICANN -- after numerous flips on the topic and lawsuit threats --
    says that they *had* to approve .xxx to be in compliance with
    their own rules.  

    In other words, "rules are rules" -- "the law is the law" --
    real world terrible effects be damned.

    It's an attitude that "Javert" from "Les Miserables" might
    definitely have endorsed.

       -- Lauren Weinstein
          NNSquad Moderator ]